Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: Invitation to Co-Sign Letter to IEEE Election Candidatesregarding ISTO

Jim's message raises an interesting issue: how would 802 go about 
getting an item onto the agenda of the IEEE-SA Standards Board?

I have heard that a motion related to ISTO was entered at the 
Standards Board meeting but was not voted upon. If 802 wanted a 
motion entered and voted upon, what would we do to ensure that result?

What about a motion asking the Computer Society Standards Activity 
Board (SAB) to make a motion? Do they have any status at the 
Standards Board, or the the Board just a bunch of individuals?

Even if the SAB has no status, I suspect that their members may 
support us if we suggested a specific motion.


P.S. I support Bob Love's suggestion.

>To date, IEEE 802 has been very apolitical on the IEEE-SA BOG elections. We
>have not individually offered a candidate from IEEE 802 specifically, we
>have not lobbied hard for any candidates, and we have stayed out of the IEEE
>BOG politics (as it does not immediately affect the things we do best, which
>is to write a standard). We do have strong participation from IEEE 802 in
>the Standards Board (NesCom, RevCom, Board), because these organizations
>directly affect our standards process.  We have a very distant relationship
>with the Computer Society, which is our sponsor, but hardly mentioned in our
>efforts. I also work somewhat with Communications Society, through a
>bi-monthly 802 column in Newtork Magazine. But the main efforts of the
>leadership is on standards.
>I would rather concentrate on making IEEE 802 a better place to do
>standards, improve our own process as needed, than participate in the
>"standards arena" politics. Between ANSI initiatives, IEEE-ISTO, IEEE
>Corporate Members, TIA activities with Ethernet, there is a lot going on for
>anyone who wants to battle here. I have done some of this (more than I
>want), in my job as chair of IEEE 802, but view that if IEEE 802 does
>timely, high quality public standards, then we will be successful.
>I don't believe we should use our 802ALL reflector for political actions and
>supporting candidates - without a specific SEC motion. I do have some
>thoughts on how to position IEEE 802 organization better in the future, and
>was planning to schedule an hour on Sunday evening after the rules
>Jim Carlo( Cellular:1-214-693-1776 Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
>TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
>Chair, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Telecom and Info Exchange Between Systems
>Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee
>-----Original Message-----
>From: []On
>Behalf Of RDLove
>Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 6:31 AM
>To: Roger B. Marks
>Subject: Re: Invitation to Co-Sign Letter to IEEE Election
>Candidatesregarding ISTO
>Roger, I firmly support your effort and would support having Buzz send a
>copy of your invitation to the entire 802 mailing list.
>Jim, can that be done without a separate motion and email ballot?  I believe
>we have already stated the 802 SEC position which reflects Roger's posted
>letter to the candidates.  This is certainly one case where time is of the
>Best regards,
>Robert D. Love
>President, LAN Connect Consultants
>7105 Leveret Circle     Raleigh, NC 27615
>Phone: 919 848-6773       Mobile: 919 810-7816
>email:          Fax: 720 222-0900
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Roger B. Marks <>
>To: <>; <>
>Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 4:51 PM
>Subject: Invitation to Co-Sign Letter to IEEE Election Candidatesregarding
>>  8 October 2000
>>  IEEE is now carrying out its annual election. Many candidates have
>>  prepared position statements, but none addresses the issue of how
>>  IEEE will deal with its Industry Standards and Technology
>>  Organization (ISTO). As a voter, it is essential for me to understand
>>  their positions on this critical issue.
>  >
>>  In order to gather input on this topic, and to educate the candidates
>>  on it, I have prepared a letter inquiring as to their positions. I
>>  have posted the letter to my personal web site
>>  <>.
>>  In order to let the candidates know that others share my interest in
>>  their positions, I am requesting that those who do please let me know
>>  that they they wish to be listed as co-signers of the letter. To
>>  join, first read the letter and then follow the link at the end to a
>>  simple form. I will ask for your name and IEEE status to pass along
>>  to the candidates, and I will collect your email address so that I
>>  may pass any responses back to you. I will also post candidate
>>  responses to the web.
>>  Time is short. I will distribute my letter to the candidates in one
>>  week: on 15 October 2000. I will post their responses as I receive
>>  them. On 26 October, I will email the co-signers (and other
>>  interested individuals and groups) with a URL to the candidate
>>  positions. This is six days before the 1 November 2000 deadline for
>>  the receipt of ballots.
>>  If you care about this issue, please read the letter
>>  <> and then co-sign it immediately if
>>  you wish.
>>  If IEEE is to continue to function as a vibrantly democratic
>>  institution, the members need to know the stance of the candidates on
>>  the most important issues we face. If you are interested in IEEE's
>>  relationship with ISTO, please participate by joining me.
>>  Regards,
>>  Roger Marks, IEEE Member
>>  Please feel free to distribute this Invitation to colleagues who may
>>  be interested.
>>  cc: candidates in IEEE Election